Week in Review

The problem with renewable energy sources is that they take up a lot of real estate. To save the environment they must take a big footprint in that environment. And big things cost a lot of money. Such as solar farms. Or wind farms. Even though the ‘fuel’ is free. Sun. And wind. Which is why free solar and wind power is some of the most costly power. And if that wasn’t bad enough we also have to evict some of the indigenous life from their natural habitat (see Sunflower mirrors power California’s desert farm by Rowan Hooper posted 2/13/2014 on New Scientist).

IT TAKES a couple of seconds to work out what’s going on in this photo. You’re looking at a pair of heliostat mirrors – sunflower-like reflectors that turn to track the sun during the day. These are just two of hundreds of thousands such mirrors arranged in the Mojave Desert in California, all part of the Ivanpah solar power project.

Their job is to concentrate the sun’s rays onto boilers located on three central towers, turning water into steam that drives turbines. The site (below) covers 14 square kilometres and will produce at least 377 megawatts of electricity, not much below the summer output of a typical nuclear power station in the US and enough to power 140,000 homes in California…

The project has been controversial. Native American groups have objected, claiming it will impact burial grounds. The project was also held up while desert tortoises – a threatened species – were relocated away from the Ivanpah site. It highlights the fact that even renewable energy projects can have some adverse environmental impacts.

Hundreds of thousands of mirrors? That must have cost a pretty penny. I wonder what happens when the desert winds blow sand onto those mirrors. Either making them dirty and less reflective. Or dulling them by the natural sandblasting of the blowing sand that has worn away solid rock in the dessert. Making them less reflective. Requiring periodic cleaning of these mirrors. And their replacement over time. Thus making a very costly power generation system even more costly.

If we’re not hacking eagles to death with wind turbines we’re kicking another threatened species from its home. Neither of which happens when we burn coal in a coal-fired power plant. While there is only a theory that these coal-fired power plants are harming the wildlife on the planet it is a fact that renewable energy is. So one can only conclude that wildlife like eagles and desert tortoises prefer coal-fired power plants over solar and wind power. Which isn’t harming them. As is evidenced by their being around after centuries of burning coal only to suffer harm from solar and wind power.

Politics 101

Democrats offered Enthusiastic Applause for Unsound Policy Proposals that have no Basis in Reality

President Obama’s 2014 State of the Union address was a little longer than an hour. But if you didn’t look at a clock it felt a lot longer. For it was the same tripe you hear all the time from this administration. And the political left. It was full of misleading statements. Inaccurate facts and figures. And some lies. The usual stuff you expect from the liberal left. But what was really disturbing was the enthusiastic applause for some really unsound policy proposals that have no basis in reality. Showing either how clueless these enthusiastic Democrats are about economics, business, national security, etc. Or how amoral they are in their quest for power. As they judge and implement policy not by how it will improve the lives of Americans. But how it will improve their lives in government.

If there was ever an example of what people not to have in power this state of the union theater was it. Following are excerpts from President Obama’s speech (see FULL TRANSCRIPT: Obama’s 2014 State of the Union address posted 1/28/2014 on The Washington Post). Comments and analysis follow each excerpt.

And here are the results of your efforts: the lowest unemployment rate in over five years; a rebounding housing market — (applause) — a manufacturing sector that’s adding jobs for the first time since the 1990s — (applause) — more oil produced — more oil produced at home than we buy from the rest of the world, the first time that’s happened in nearly twenty years — (applause) — our deficits cut by more than half; and for the first time — (applause) — for the first time in over a decade, business leaders around the world have declared that China is no longer the world’s number one place to invest; America is.

The total number of people who left the civilian labor force since President Obama took office is 11,301,000 (see The BLS Employment Situation Summary for December 2013 posted 1/13/2014 on PITHOCRATES). Which means the unemployment rate is meaningless. The only reason why it’s falling is that the BLS doesn’t count unemployed people who gave up looking for jobs that just aren’t there. Oil production on private land may be up. While overall oil consumption is down because of the Great Recession that just won’t end. Which is helping to keep gas prices down. Unemployed people just don’t have the money to buy gas. So they don’t. Greatly reducing the demand for gas. Thus reducing gas prices and oil imports. George W. Bush’s last deficit was $498.37 billion. President Obama’s first deficit was $1,539.22 billion. And it was over $1 trillion in 2010, 2011 and 2012. It fell to $680 billion in 2013 thanks to the sequester. But the deficit is larger now than when President Obama assumed office. The only reduction in the deficit is a reduction in the amount he increased it.

Now, as president, I’m committed to making Washington work better, and rebuilding the trust of the people who sent us here.

Really? You’re committed to rebuilding the trust of the people? Mr. “If you like your health insurance you can keep your health insurance. Period.” Otherwise known as the lie of the year. You’re going to rebuild the trust of the people? Good luck with that. What with your pants on fire and all.

Today, after four years of economic growth, corporate profits and stock prices have rarely been higher, and those at the top have never done better. But average wages have barely budged. Inequality has deepened. Upward mobility has stalled. The cold, hard fact is that even in the midst of recovery, too many Americans are working more than ever just to get by; let alone to get ahead. And too many still aren’t working at all.

Well, finally something Republicans can agree with the president about. Yes, his economic policies have benefitted Wall Street. While hurting Main Street. Finally some bipartisan agreement.

So let’s make that decision easier for more companies. Both Democrats and Republicans have argued that our tax code is riddled with wasteful, complicated loopholes that punish businesses investing here, and reward companies that keep profits abroad. Let’s flip that equation. Let’s work together to close those loopholes, end those incentives to ship jobs overseas, and lower tax rates for businesses that create jobs right here at home. (Cheers, applause.)

There are only a few reasons why businesses export jobs. And the big three are taxes, regulations and labor costs. The Obama administration wants to raise taxes. They’ve increased regulatory costs. And they support costly union labor. So everything they stand for encourages businesses to export jobs.

But — but I’ll act on my own to slash bureaucracy and streamline the permitting process for key projects, so we can get more construction workers on the job as fast as possible. (Applause.)

So how’s that approval for the Keystone XL pipeline coming along? That thing you’ve been studying since 2010? Which by the laws of arithmetic is approximately 4 years ago. Is this slashing bureaucracy and streamlining the permitting process? At this rate it would probably be quicker to elect a Republican president in 2016. You know, someone who, when it comes to economic activity, walks it while the Democrats only talk it.

We also have the chance, right now, to beat other countries in the race for the next wave of high-tech manufacturing jobs. And my administration’s launched two hubs for high-tech manufacturing in Raleigh, North Carolina, and Youngstown, Ohio, where we’ve connected businesses to research universities that can help America lead the world in advanced technologies.

Universities are in the grant business. They want as many grants as they can get to help bring money into the university. And to do so they will study anything the government wants them to. No matter how wasteful it is. While some of the biggest high-tech companies started in garages. Apple, Google, Hewlett Packard and Microsoft. To name a few. Yes, there is a lot of university-driven research. But the big innovation is more entrepreneurial. Created by people thinking up new stuff no one thought of yet. Which is the last thing you want government involved in. That same government that can’t build a website using 1990s technology.

Let’s do more to help the entrepreneurs and small business owners who create most new jobs in America. Over the past five years, my administration has made more loans to small business owners than any other. And when 98 percent of our exporters are small businesses, new trade partnerships with Europe and the Asia-Pacific will help them create even more jobs. We need to work together on tools like bipartisan trade promotion authority to protect our workers, protect our environment and open new markets to new goods stamped “Made in the USA.” (Applause.)

You want to help entrepreneurs and small business? Get rid of Obamacare. And slash tax rates. This will provide incentive. And allow them to reinvest more of their earnings to grow their business. Allowing them to create those jobs.

Now, one of the biggest factors in bringing more jobs back is our commitment to American energy. The “all the above” energy strategy I announced a few years ago is working, and today America is closer to energy independence than we have been in decades. (Applause.)

‘All of the above’ as long as it isn’t coal, oil or nuclear. But if it’s solar power and wind power they are committed to giving more tax dollars to their friends and bundlers in the green energy industry.

Meanwhile, my administration will keep working with the industry to sustain production and jobs growth while strengthening protection of our air, our water, our communities. And while we’re at it, I’ll use my authority to protect more of our pristine federal lands for future generations. (Applause.)

You can’t sustain production and jobs growth by strengthening protection of our air, water and pristine federal lands. That’s just more regulatory costs. And raising energy costs by not allowing any oil or natural gas production on those pristine federal lands. Raising energy costs by restricting supply. Which raises business costs. In addition to those new regulatory costs.

Every four minutes another American home or business goes solar, every panel pounded into place by a worker whose job can’t be outsourced. Let’s continue that progress with a smarter tax policy that stops giving $4 billion a year to fossil fuel industries that don’t need it so we can invest more in fuels of the future that do. (Cheers, applause.)

That says it all. Fossil fuels don’t need subsidies because their costs are affordable. While solar (and wind power) are so costly that they are unaffordable. Unless government heavily subsidizes them.

But the debate is settled. Climate change is a fact. (Applause.) And when our children’s children look us in the eye and ask if we did all we could to leave them a safer, more stable world, with new sources of energy, I want us to be able to say yes, we did. (Cheers, applause.)

There is no such thing as settled science. Only science that has yet to be disproved. Besides, once upon a time glaciers stretched down from the poles to near the equator. And then receded back to where they are now. All without any manmade carbon in the atmosphere to warm the planet. As we were still simple hunter and gatherers then. So if the glaciers moved more before there was manmade global warming they’ll move again regardless of what man is doing to warm the planet.

Finally, if we’re serious about economic growth, it is time to heed the call of business leaders, labor leaders, faith leaders, law enforcement — and fix our broken immigration system. (Cheers, applause.) Republicans and Democrats in the Senate have acted, and I know that members of both parties in the House want to do the same. Independent economists say immigration reform will grow our economy and shrink our deficits by almost $1 trillion in the next two decades. And for good reason: When people come here to fulfill their dreams — to study, invent, contribute to our culture — they make our country a more attractive place for businesses to locate and create jobs for everybody. So let’s get immigration reform done this year. (Cheers, applause.) Let’s get it done. It’s time.

Funny how that argument doesn’t apply to birth control and abortion. The reason we need to “fix our broken immigration system.” For if we were having babies at the rate when government created the welfare state we could pay for that welfare state today. But thanks to the Sixties, birth control, abortion and feminism women stopped having babies. Which is fine if a woman doesn’t want to. But the progressives designed the welfare state based on them being baby machines. Creating a greater number of taxpayers with each generation. So more people pay into the welfare state than collect from it. The way it must be for a Ponzi scheme to work.

That’s why I’ve been asking CEOs to give more long-term unemployed workers a fair shot at new jobs, a new chance to support their families. And in fact, this week many will come to the White House to make that commitment real.

When you raise the cost of labor (union labor, Obamacare, etc.) businesses tend to look at automating production instead of hiring that costly labor. They may not be able to do anything about the higher regulatory costs but they can do something about higher labor costs. Use more machines than people. If you want CEOs to create new jobs stop making labor so costly. And you can start with getting rid of Obamacare.

Of course, it’s not enough to train today’s workforce. We also have to prepare tomorrow’s workforce, by guaranteeing every child access to a world-class education. (Applause.)…

Five years ago we set out to change the odds for all our kids. We worked with lenders to reform student loans, and today more young people are earning college degrees than ever before. Race to the Top, with the help of governors from both parties, has helped states raise expectations and performance. Teachers and principals in schools from Tennessee to Washington, D.C., are making big strides in preparing students with the skills for the new economy — problem solving, critical thinking, science, technology, engineering, math.

Yes, more kids are going to college than ever before. But they’re going there to have fun. And to facilitate their fun many are getting easy, worthless degrees in the social sciences and humanities. Costly degrees that universities sold them promising them future riches. Enriching the university. While impoverishing their graduates. For a high-tech company has no use for these degrees. Which is why a lot of these people end up in jobs they didn’t need that costly degree to do. And our high-tech companies are using the visa program to get foreigners who have the skills they want. Problem solving, critical thinking, science, technology, engineering and math.

It requires everything from more challenging curriculums and more demanding parents to better support for teachers and new ways to measure how well our kids think, not how well they can fill in a bubble on a test. But it is worth it — and it is working.

If you want kids to do better we need to champion marriage and family more. And they should embrace religion a little more. Instead of encouraging our young women to use birth control and abortion to avoid marriage and family. And pulling every last vestige of religion from our lives. Kids growing up in a household with a mother and a father who go to church do far better on average than kids growing up in a single-parent household and don’t go to church (see Strong families steeped in Conservative Values and Traditions do Well in America posted 1/11/2014 on PITHOCRATES).

Research shows that one of the best investments we can make in a child’s life is high-quality early education. (Applause.) Last year, I asked this Congress to help states make high-quality pre-K available to every 4-year-old. And as a parent as well as a president, I repeat that request tonight.

Actually, research doesn’t show that. Yet they keep saying that. For it’s like that line in the musical Evita, “Get them while they’re young, Evita. Get them while they’re young.” The sooner they can take them away from their parents the sooner they can start turning them into Democrat voters. Such as teaching them to blame their parents for the manmade global warming that is killing the polar bears as they have no ice to rest on while eating their baby seals.

You know, today, women make up about half our workforce, but they still make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. That is wrong, and in 2014, it’s an embarrassment.

Women deserve equal pay for equal work. (Cheers, applause.)

Actually, it’s closer to 91 cents (see The White House’s use of data on the gender wage gap by Glenn Kessler posted 6/5/2012 on The Washington Post). And the small difference is not due to discrimination but personal choice. When you look at aggregate wages women will make less than men. Because more women are teachers (with 3 month off without pay) than men are. Some women work fewer hours at work to spend more time with their children. While men tend to work more overtime. Men also work the more dangerous and higher paying jobs. And are more likely to belong to a union. When you compare childless, single men and women with a college degree some women are actually earning more than men. Figures don’t lie but liars figure. And for the contortions the Obama administration did here The Washington Post’s The Fact Checker gave the president one Pinocchio.

Now, women hold a majority of lower-wage jobs, but they’re not the only ones stifled by stagnant wages. Americans understand that some people will earn more money than others, and we don’t resent those who, by virtue of their efforts, achieve incredible success. That’s what America’s all about. But Americans overwhelmingly agree that no one who works full-time should ever have to raise a family in poverty. (Applause.)

In the year since I asked this Congress to raise the minimum wage, five states have passed laws to raise theirs.

You’re not going to have a lot of upward mobility when you pay people more to remain in the jobs they hate. All the talk about making college more affordable and bringing employers and community colleges together to help give people the skills they need to fill the jobs employers have is all for nothing if they just pay people more for doing an entry-level job.

Let’s do more to help Americans save for retirement. Today most workers don’t have a pension. A Social Security check often isn’t enough on its own. And while the stock market has doubled over the last five years, that doesn’t help folks who don’t have 401(k)s. That’s why tomorrow I will direct the Treasury to create a new way for working Americans to start their own retirement savings: MyRA. It’s a — it’s a new savings bond that encourages folks to build a nest egg.

Once upon a time people opened a savings account at their local bank and they saved to buy a house. And they saved for their retirement. That’s how people saved when they didn’t have a pension or a 401(k). They can’t do that today because of the Federal Reserve destroying the banking industry by keeping interest rates at zero. If the Fed stopped printing money and let investment capital come from our savings like they did before the Keynesians gave us the Federal Reserve people would be saving like we once did. And we’d stop having Great Depressions, stagflation and Great Recessions. Created by their prolonging the growth side of the business cycle. Which raises prices higher than they normally would go. Making the contraction side of the business cycle that much more painful. As those prices have a much longer way to fall than they normally would. Thanks to the Fed’s meddling with interest rates.

MyRA guarantees a decent return with no risk of losing what you put in. And if this Congress wants to help, work with me to fix an upside-down tax code that gives big tax breaks to help the wealthy save, but does little or nothing for middle-class Americans, offer every American access to an automatic IRA on the job, so they can save at work just like everybody in this chamber can.

You know why they want these MyRAs? Because they can’t stand people saving money. They love Social Security. Because they can borrow from the Social Security Trust Fund. Which is what they will do with these MyRAs. They will take this money and spend it. Filling the MyRA Trust Fund with a bunch of IOUs. Just like they do with the Social Security Trust Fund. And then provide a retirement benefit like Social Security. That is too small to live on. Whereas if we saved the money ourselves our retirement nest-egg will be much larger. And it will provide for our retirement. Unlike Social Security.

And since the most important investment many families make is their home, send me legislation that protects taxpayers from footing the bill for a housing crisis ever again, and keeps the dream of homeownership alive for future generations. (Applause.)

It was Bill Clinton that set the stage for the subprime mortgage crisis with his Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending (see Bill Clinton created the subprime mortgage crisis with his Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending posted 11/6/2011 on PITHOCRATES). Using the heavy hand of government to get lenders to qualify the unqualified. Then the Fed’s artificially low interest rates were the bait for the trap. Enticing people to borrow huge sums of money because those interest rates were just too good to pass up. Even if they weren’t planning to buy a house to begin with. The subprime mortgage crisis and the resulting Great Recession were government made. If we want to prevent the taxpayers from footing the bill for another housing crisis we need to get the Keynesians out of government.

Already, because of the Affordable Care Act, more than 3 million Americans under age 26 have gained coverage under their parents’ plans. (Applause.)

More than 9 million Americans have signed up for private health insurance or Medicaid coverage — 9 million. (Applause.)

The Washington Post gave this lie three Pinocchios (see Warning: Ignore claims that 3.9 million people signed up for Medicaid because of Obamacare by Glenn Kessler posted 1/16/2014 on The Washington Post). For they’re counting some 3.9 million who would have signed up anyway for Medicaid regardless of the Affordable Care Act. Also, the government was counting people who put a health care plan into their shopping cart as if they signed up for it. Which many couldn’t. As they haven’t programmed the back end of the health care website yet to actually accept payment or to pass that information on to the insurers.

And here’s another number: zero. Because of this law, no American, none, zero, can ever again be dropped or denied coverage for a pre-existing condition like asthma or back pain or cancer. (Cheers, applause.) No woman can ever be charged more just because she’s a woman. (Cheers, applause.) And we did all this while adding years to Medicare’s finances, keeping Medicare premiums flat and lowering prescription costs for millions of seniors.

That’s right. Women with reproductive systems that men don’t have won’t pay more for their health insurance than men pay for theirs. How can they do that? Simple. They just are charging men more. To cover the cost of a reproductive system they don’t have.

Citizenship means standing up for the lives that gun violence steals from us each day. I have seen the courage of parents, students, pastors, and police officers all over this country who say “we are not afraid,” and I intend to keep trying, with or without Congress, to help stop more tragedies from visiting innocent Americans in our movie theaters and our shopping malls, or schools like Sandy Hook. (Applause.)

If you take away guns from law-abiding gun owners that won’t keep dangerous people with mental health issues that want to harm people out of our movie theaters, our shopping malls or schools like Sandy Hook. For there are other ways to harm people. Just look at the Boston Marathon bombers. The people he’s talking about not only had mental health issues but they were also smart. Many were even college students. Who probably could think of other ways to hurt people. And you just can’t take away everything they might use to harm people. But you can place these people somewhere where they can’t harm anyone.

You see, in a world of complex threats, our security, our leadership depends on all elements of our power — including strong and principled diplomacy. American diplomacy has rallied more than 50 countries to prevent nuclear materials from falling into the wrong hands, and allowed us to reduce our own reliance on Cold War stockpiles.

Since President Obama assumed office he did nothing to support the Green Revolution in Iran. Which kept the hard-line Islamists in power there. He gave Egypt to the Muslim Brotherhood by telling Hosni Mubarak that he had to go. Removing the stable anchor of the Middle East. And moved Egypt closer to Iran. (The Egyptian people eventually rose up to overthrow the oppressive Muslim Brotherhood). He went to war in Libya and helped to overthrow Colonel Muammar Qaddafi. Who at the time was a quasi ally in the War on Terror. After the Iraq invasion frightened him into believing he may be next. President Obama was thanked for his Libyan war by al Qaeda with 4 dead Americans in Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11. He waited too long to act in the Syrian civil war. Which only brought al Qaeda into the conflict. He failed to attain a status of forces agreement in Iraq. So he pulled all U.S. forces out of Iraq which has only invited al Qaeda in. And it looks like this will be repeated in Afghanistan. He blamed George W. Bush’s wars as recruitment tools for al Qaeda. While his extensive drone use is doing the same thing. Especially in Yemen. The hotbed of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. All that his diplomacy and leadership has done was to make the world a more dangerous place.

American diplomacy, backed by the threat of force, is why Syria’s chemical weapons are being eliminated. (Applause.) And we will continue to work with the international community to usher in the future the Syrian people deserve — a future free of dictatorship, terror and fear.

His diplomacy with Bashar al-Assad in Syria only gave his oppressive regime legitimacy in the civil war he was raging against his people. Making it easier for Assad to kill Syrians with conventional arms while he gives up a token amount of his chemical weapons. While also making Russia who brokered the deal the dominate player in the region.

And it is American diplomacy, backed by pressure, that has halted the progress of Iran’s nuclear program — and rolled back parts of that program — for the very first time in a decade. As we gather here tonight, Iran has begun to eliminate its stockpile of higher levels of enriched uranium.

It’s not installing advanced centrifuges. Unprecedented inspections help the world verify every day that Iran is not building a bomb. And with our allies and partners, we’re engaged in negotiations to see if we can peacefully achieve a goal we all share: preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. (Applause.)

All Iran is doing is pausing their program. And chemically altering some of their enriched uranium to meet the requirements of this diplomatic deal. But this chemical process is reversible. And they will reverse it once they get what they want. This deal makes the world no safer. If anything it makes it more dangerous. For it does not diminish the Iranian nuclear program in the least. But gives them more time to work on it as they prop up their regime with much needed supplies thanks to a relaxation of the sanctions against them.

These negotiations will be difficult; they may not succeed. We are clear-eyed about Iran’s support for terrorist organizations like Hezbollah, which threaten our allies; and we’re clear about the mistrust between our nations, mistrust that cannot be wished away. But these negotiations don’t rely on trust; any long-term deal we agree to must be based on verifiable action that convinces us and the international community that Iran is not building a nuclear bomb. If John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan could negotiate with the Soviet Union, then surely a strong and confident America can negotiate with less powerful adversaries today. (Applause.)

The sanctions that we put in place helped make this opportunity possible. But let me be clear: if this Congress sends me a new sanctions bill now that threatens to derail these talks, I will veto it. (Applause.) For the sake of our national security, we must give diplomacy a chance to succeed.

The Soviet Union never attacked U.S. soil. And there was a reason they didn’t. They were rational. And knew they would lose a great deal in a war with America. Especially a nuclear one. Which is why they never used their nuclear weapons. But Iran giving a nuclear weapon to a shadowy group that is not a state? With little to lose in using a nuclear weapon? If it’s not a nuclear missile there will be no way in knowing where the nuclear bomb came from. We can have our suspicions that Iran made it and gave it to someone. But do we nuke Iran over that? What if there are more nukes in the hands of al Qaeda, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, etc.? You could nuke Iran back to the Stone Age but it won’t stop those others being used. The president insists this will not happen as Iran signed an agreement. The only problem with that is the Iranians are liars. And they call the United States the Great Satan. These two facts suggest that replacing those sanctions with a promise not to build nuclear bombs was probably not a wise trade.

But for more than two hundred years, we have put those things aside and placed our collective shoulder to the wheel of progress: to create and build and expand the possibilities of individual achievement; to free other nations from tyranny and fear; to promote justice and fairness and equality under the law, so that the words set to paper by our founders are made real for every citizen.

Use our collective shoulder to expand individual achievement? The president believes in the former more than the latter. He didn’t help the Iranians get free from tyranny when he had the chance. And he turned the Egyptian people over to tyranny. The Muslim Brotherhood. Who were oppressing women and Christians. Fairness and equality under the law? Ask those Tea Party groups who were targeted by the IRS about fairness and equality under the law. The Constitution? That document of negative rights? The left hates it. And insists it’s a living document that can evolve over time to suit the needs of an expanding government. So they can do exactly what the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution to prevent from happening.

The Left endorses Unsound Policy Proposals with no Basis in Reality to improve their Chances of Winning Elections

The country is more conservative than liberal (see Liberal Self-Identification Edges Up to New High in 2013 by Jeffrey M. Jones posted 1/10/2014 on Gallup). Which is why liberals want state-funded pre-K to start indoctrinating our children as soon as possible. To get them away from their parents so they can begin the process of turning them into Democrat voters. It’s why kids are getting worthless social science and humanities degrees. To further indoctrinate them. Because their views are minority views. So they need to play loose with the facts. And lie. Which is easier to do with indoctrinated kids than educated adults. You’ll even hear Democrats talk about lowering the voting age. To get a few more years of voting out of these kids before they grow old and wise. And begin voting conservative. So they do what they can to dumb down education. Lie. Cheat. And buy as many votes as they can by giving away free stuff. And the thing they really want to give away is citizenship for illegal aliens. Who they are sure will be forever grateful. And show it by voting Democrat.

This explains the enthusiastic applause for unsound policy proposals that have no basis in reality. For the left is not interested in improving the lives of Americans. They just want to improve their chances of winning elections.

Week in Review

You can either fight ‘manmade’ global warming or you can have low energy prices. But you can’t have both (see British Gas to raise prices by 9.2% posted 10/17/2013 on BBC News Business).

British Gas is to increase prices for domestic customers, with a dual-fuel bill going up by 9.2% from 23 November.

The increase, which will affect nearly eight million households in the UK, includes an 8.4% rise in gas prices and a 10.4% increase in electricity prices.

The company said it “understands the frustration” of prices rising faster than incomes. The average annual household bill will go up by £123 [$198.89]…

The company said that the cost of buying energy on the global markets, delivering gas and electricity to customers’ homes, and the government’s “green” levies, were all factors in the decision to put up prices.

With a focus on renewables we bring fewer fossil fuels to market. Coal, oil and natural gas. And with the war against clean nuclear power we’re shutting down our reactors. So instead we focus on the more costly wind and solar power. Because it takes a lot more costly infrastructure to capture the ‘free’ energy from the sun and the wind. So much that the taxpayer has to subsidize them. To bring us that ‘free’ energy. When the sun is shining and the wind is blowing, that is. Which brings us to that costly distribution system.

People can put solar arrays on their home to use that ‘free’ solar power during sunny days. But what about cloudy days? And night? Wind farms can generate ‘free’ wind power when the winds are blowing right. But what about when they are not blowing right? Either too fast? Too slow? Or not at all? What then? Fossil fuels. That’s what.

Baseload power (typically coal that takes hours to bring on line) is a funny thing. To be cost effective power plants run at full capacity 24/7. When demand rises they can bring on some ‘peaker’ units (typically gas that are quick to bring on line) to add additional capacity. So power companies have to maintain baseload power even if the people aren’t buying any to be available when solar and wind aren’t. And if all the homes disconnected from the grid and ran on solar power during the day the power companies would still have to keep them physically connected to the grid. So these homes can use their power at night.

This is why energy prices are rising. Revenue at power companies are falling due to that ‘free’ wind and solar power while their expenses are not. And because they are selling to fewer customers they have to charge them more to cover their expenses.

Affordable energy for the people lies with fossil fuels. Not renewables. Governments have to choose. All the people. Or their liberal base. Less costly power from fossil fuels. Or more costly power from renewables. It’s that easy. For you can fight ‘manmade’ global warming or you can have low energy prices. You just can’t have both.

Week in Review

In 2003 one power plant went off line for maintenance in Ohio. As their electrical load switched over to other power lines the extra current in them caused them to heat up and sag. Coming into contact with some tall trees. And the electric power flashed over to the trees. This surge in current opened some breakers and transferred this electric load to other cables. Overloading these lines. More breakers opened. More lines disconnected. And with the electric load switching around it caused some electric generators to spin a little wildly. So they disconnected from the grid as designed to protect themselves.

Eventually this cascade of failures would cause one of the greatest power outages in history. The Northeast blackout of 2003. Affecting some 55 million people. And taking 256 power plants offline. Apparently there was a software bug in the computer control system that didn’t warn them in time to rebalance the grid on other power sources before this cascade of failures began. Once the event was over it took a lot of time to bring the power back online. Three days before all power was restored. Because you have to reconnect generators slowly and carefully. As you are connecting generators together. If these generators are not running in phase with each other fault currents can flow between them. Damaging them and starting another cascade of failures.

So the electric grid is a very complex network of generators, cables, switches and computer control systems. The more generation plants added to the grid the more complicated the switching and the computer controls. Which makes having large-capacity power generation plants highly desirable. For it reduces the complexity of the system. And their large power capacity makes it easier for them to take on additional loads when another plant goes offline or a cable fails. It provides a safe margin of error when trying to balance electric loads between available generation. In Germany, though, the politics of green energy may take precedence over good engineering practices (see Linked Renewables Could Help Germany Avoid Blackouts by Paul Brown and The Daily Climate posted 4/5/2013 on Scientific American).

Critics of renewables have always claimed that sun and wind are only intermittent producers of electricity and need fossil fuel plants as back-up to make them viable. But German engineers have proved this is not so.

By skillfully combining the output of a number of solar, wind and biogas plants the grid can be provided with stable energy 24 hours a day without fear of blackouts, according to the Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology (IWES) in Kassel.

For Germany, having turned its back on nuclear power and investing heavily in all forms of renewables to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions, this is an important breakthrough…

Kurt Rohrig, deputy director of IWES, said: “Each source of energy – be it wind, sun or biogas – has its strengths and weaknesses. If we manage to skillfully combine the different characteristics of the regenerative energies, we can ensure the power supply for Germany.”

The idea is that many small power plant operators can feed their electricity into the grid but act as a single power plant using computers to control the level of power…

The current system of supplying the grid with electricity is geared to a few large producers. In the new system, with dozens of small producers, there will need to be extra facilities at intervals on the system to stabilize voltage. Part of the project is designed to find out how many of these the country will need.

The project has the backing of Germany’s large and increasingly important renewable companies and industrial giants like Siemans.

If you are a heavy electric power consumer in Germany you might want to build your own power plant on site. For if they go ahead with this they are going to create one complex and costly monster. Which is why IWES and Siemens no doubt are on board with this. For it would give them a lot of business in a recession-plagued Eurozone. But the amount of switching and computer controls to make this work just boggles the mind.

Just imagine a night of high winds that shuts down all wind farms. Which is something a wind turbine does to protect itself. You can’t switch over to solar at night. So you will have to switch that load over to the remaining power lines that are connected to active generation. Heating those wires up. Causing them to sag. Perhaps flashing over to a tall tree. If these lines disconnect from the grid will those small producers be able to pick up the demand? Or will they disconnect to protect themselves from an overload? Once the event is over how long would it take to bring all of these generation sources back in phase and back online?

If they move forward with this chances are that the Germans are going to learn a very painful and costly lesson about green energy. It may make you look like you care but it won’t keep the lights on like a coal-fired or a nuclear power plant can. Which they may learn. The hard way.

Week in Review

The American Left looks at China with awe and reverence. They see that huge export economy and they know how they did that. Massive government control over the economy. And Keynesian economics on such a grand scale that it would even impress Paul Krugman. Nobel-winning Keynesian economist who’s constant refrain is that the government just never spends enough. Something no one can say about the Chinese Communists. And that’s why the American Left loves China. For when it comes to the economy they wield dictatorial power. If the American Left had those powers they could accomplish so much. Beginning with the arrest of the Republican opposition and deportation to reeducation camps. Then they could make our economy hum. Just like in China. Where brilliant government bureaucrats educated in the finest Ivy League universities called all the shots. For only those who despise free market capitalism would know how to truly optimize economic output (see Game Over for China’s Photovoltaic Manufacturers by Gao Zitan & Frank Fang posted 1/6/2013 on TheEpochTimes).

It was in October of 2011 when the U.S. and European PV companies decided that enough is enough. Over the last years they had to compete against Chinese companies selling their products below cost. As a result many European and U.S. companies had to close down. The remaining ones chose to appeal to regulators to stop the unfair practices.

Note once again who is complaining about companies selling things too cheaply. It is not the consumer. For the consumer never complains that they aren’t being charged enough. It is always another business requesting antitrust protection against a company they cannot compete against.

The Chinese regime viewed solar photovoltaic production as a promising industry with rapid scalability and production, and high profits. It could add to GDP growth and employment. This is why the regime greatly promoted the growth in the domestic PV market through business-oriented regulations and incentives. Banks, local governments and other financial agencies were ordered to heavily subsidize the solar industry with cheap loans.

Starting in 2009, the regime sponsored some large-scale national PV projects. The Solar PV building program comprised 111 projects and the Golden Sun program included 275 projects. Provincial or municipal funded programs provided the framework for many other PV related projects.

This is exactly what the Left wants to do. What the Obama administration did. They want smart government bureaucrats to tweak market forces to make things better. At least this is what these government people think. Because they are so smart. Even though they have no business experience. So the American Left wants to do exactly what China did. What the Americans did but on a much grander scale. Because their communist government had the power to do it on a grander scale. Something the American Left laments that the American government doesn’t have that kind of power. Yet the Americans want to penalize the Chinese for unfair practices. Despite constantly championing the Chinese way.

In 2008, there were less than 100 PV enterprises. But by the end of 2011 there were more than 500 PV companies, a five-fold increase, according to Guangzhou-based business newspaper 21st Century Business Herald…

On the surface, Chinese companies were doing well. Revenue of the PV industry was more than 300 billion yuan ($48 billion) and Chinese companies occupied five spots in the top 10 of global solar cell manufacturers, according to the report. However, the fast expansion of PV production capacity did not match domestic demand.

According to statistics of EU ProSun, in 2011, China reached a total PV production capacity of 45 GW but domestic consumption was only 2 GW. The production capacity spurred by massive subsidies and state incentives was over 20 times higher than actual demand for solar powered electricity. The only way out was exporting the surplus production…

As a result of lower subsidies in Europe and tariffs in the United States, the overproduction stimulated by state subsidies can no longer be exported. One indication is a rapid growth in inventories. Sixty-six listed Chinese PV companies of the Shanghai A-Share Stock Market showed a 20 percent increase in inventories compared with the same period of the previous year…

President of EU ProSun Milan Nitzschke said, “Chinese subsidies shield manufacturers from insolvency, and are pumped into solar companies even if they are unprofitable. Most Chinese solar companies would have gone bankrupt a long time ago if not for endless government subsidies.”

This is what happens when you have ‘smart’ government people take over the free market economy. You build a lot of stuff no one will buy. Just like the Soviets built a lot of tractor parts that sat on store shelves unsold while people stood in line to buy soap and toilet paper. This is why the command economies of communism failed. And while the command economy of the Chinese Communists will fail, too. What Friedrich Hayek of the Austrian school of economics called malinvestments. Which directs resources from making things people want to making things people don’t want. Creating shortages of the things people want (like soap and toilet paper in the Soviet Union). And overflows inventories with things people don’t want (like solar panels in China). All because a government bureaucrat decided to make more tractor parts and solar panels instead of soap and toilet paper.

China is dangerously close to a catastrophic political, economic, and social meltdown, according to a Chinese business scholar, who cites China’s growing income gap as one of its serious crisis indicators…

Rural versus urban inequality has long been recognized as a key factor in China’s income gap. Not only does the rural income level fall far below the urban level, but the income inequality is also more obvious within rural regions…

Another notable factor is high unemployment rate. The SUFE study suggests that China’s national unemployment rate was 8 percent in July 2011, suggesting an unemployed population of 27.7 million, which is almost twice as high as what authorities have admitted to. The unemployment rate doubles for 51-55-year-olds, reaching 16.4 percent, and is attributed to mergers and standardized bankruptcy of state-owned enterprises in the early 2000’s. (An explanation of mergers and standardized bankruptcy are available here and here.)

Surprisingly, the unemployment rate for 21-25-year-olds who hold college or above degrees is also 16.4 percent—the same as for the 51-55-year age group. By contrast, the rate for 21-25-year-old poorly educated migrant laborers from rural areas is only 3.4 percent. A shortage of cheap labor has affected some of China’s key export industries such as apparel and electronics, especially on the east coast.

But the root cause of the income inequality and a battery of other economic problems in China can be found in the communist regime’s overexploitation of social wealth, according to Winifred Tung, an attorney and commentator from Taiwan.

The exploitation has been realized largely through preferential policies in favor of state-owned enterprises and suppression of the private sector, Tung told NTD Television, citing recent data, which says that the GDP of large-scale state-owned enterprises (SOEs) accounts for 60 percent of China’s overall GDP. However, among the different culprits of tax evasion in China, SOEs came in first place with 26-28 percent.

So this is why they can make so many solar panels (and other export goods) so cheaply. By exploiting poor rural laborers in their big city factories. Resulting in something the American Left say wouldn’t exist if they had control over the economy like the Chinese do. An income gap. Income inequality. Something that is apparently worse in the country where the government has the power to make life fair. But it’s more than just an income gap.

Like the person whose plea made headlines around the world, I was also in Liaoning Province, China. Twelve years ago, I was imprisoned in Huludao City Forced Labor Camp, Liaoning, for 2.5 years for practicing the meditation discipline of Falun Gong. My companion Cao Yuqiang, who was eventually tortured to death, and I were watched 24 hours a day by two criminals, so that we could not exchange information regarding the persecution of Falun Gong.

One day, I came up with the bold idea to find a way to communicate information about the persecution to the outside world.

The first obstacle we faced was that we didn’t have pen or paper. So, as more and more information was passed on to me, it became quite a challenge to memorize everything! To improve my memory, I repeated the information to myself every day, since I couldn’t communicate regularly with Cao Yuqiang.

One day, out of the blue, Cao told me he had found a refill for a ball-point pen. I suspected he must have gone through a great deal of trouble to procure it, but I did not have the opportunity to ask him for any details at that time.

Now I had a pen, but there was still the question of what to write on. I finally realized that the only possibility was toilet paper, and to avoid being caught, I would have to write the message after midnight.

I had to keep strengthening my mind to overcome fear and anxiety as any negative thoughts could lead me to give up. Questions and doubts plagued my mind: “Would this work? How could we get the information out? Would I be able to withstand the torture if it was discovered? Had other prisoners found out about my plan? Were they waiting to catch me in the act?” I was certain that if my plan were discovered, I would be tortured mercilessly with electric batons.

This is part of that Chinese economic system the American Left so admires. An economy that is based on cheap labor. In some cases even slave labor. And it’s no secret. Which is odd for the American Left who are champions of the labor movement. Who bankrupted countless businesses (GM, Chrysler, Hostess, etc.) by demanding ever higher pay and benefits packages. Yet here they are. Admiring an economic system that just exploits labor in the worst ways. Even using torture. And it bothers some. Maybe not the American Left. But the Chinese themsleves (see A Young Chinese Man’s New Year Wish for His Father by Gao Zitan posted 1/1/2013 on TheEpochTimes).

As 2013 begins with an atmosphere of joy welcoming in the new year, a young man from Hubei, China, is worried about his father who is a member of the Communist Party.

The term “San Tui” in Chinese refers to the three distinct renouncements. It means to quit the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its two affiliated organizations: the Communist Youth League, and the Young Pioneers, which people are made to join in their youth.

In recent years, “the three renouncements ensure safety” has become a well-known saying in China, and many consider it a rational choice for mainland Chinese to guarantee themselves immunity from all the crimes perpetrated by the Communist Party when the day of reckoning comes. So family members of those who refuse to consider the wisdom of this option are very worried for their loved ones…

“The three renouncements ensure safety” has been widely recognized by the Chinese public since 2004, when The Epoch Times published the truth about the CCP in “Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party” in 2004, and began registering those wishing to make the three withdrawals.

As of Dec. 30, 2012, more than 130 million people had registered with The Epoch Times to quit the CCP and its affiliated organizations.

The American Left may be enthralled with the Chinese communist way just as they were enthralled with the Soviet communist way but those living under those oppressive regimes weren’t. And aren’t. China is not the China it was under Mao. But the hard-line communists are. But even some of these committed their crimes against humanity for a higher purpose. To prevent the anarchy that followed in parts of the former Soviet Union when the Soviet Union collapsed. So some may commit their crimes for good. While a lot no doubt just enjoy the privilege that comes with being in the party leadership. And the very comfortable lifestyle. Much like liberals in this country. But not the average Chinese. At least 130 million of them.

On Friday, Cuomo signed an executive order allowing distributors and transporters to bring gasoline, diesel and kerosene into New York State without being required to meet typical registration requirements.

How do you make things work faster and more efficiently? Get rid of governmental regulations. That’s right, when you need things to operate at their best you remove government. You don’t add more government. Just think how much better the economy would be if it was this way all of the time. If it was we probably wouldn’t have a U-6 unemployment rate of 14.6%.

But other means of getting fuel into the area were still limited. And that’s not such good news for drivers who have spent hours lined up for gas or for thousands of homeowners who have been forced to use gas-powered generators to light homes darkened by Sandy.

Attack oil all you want but there is a reason why we’re addicted to it. It’s the fuel that brings food to our grocery stores. It’s the fuel that lets us drive to someplace that didn’t lose their electric power so we can find food and shelter. And it’s the fuel that lets us heat our homes and refrigerate our food when we lose our electric power. Oil is the go-to fuel when everything else fails us. It’s Old Reliable. And at times the difference between life and death.

The Oil Price Information Service reported that two big pipelines were scheduled to resume partial operations Thursday and Friday, although the oil they carry only moves at a rate of three to five miles an hour.

Even if the ports and pipelines were running at full capacity, though, getting that fuel into people’s cars presents other challenges.

One is the ongoing power outages. “We are all dependent on utilities for electricity and that includes service stations and bulk terminals,” Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at OPIS, said via email…

At the retail level, tankers won’t deliver fuel to a gas station that doesn’t have electricity to power its pumps. As of Thursday, the American Automobile Association estimated that only 35 to 40 percent of gas stations in New York City and New Jersey were operating. On Long Island, the estimate was 30 to 35 percent.

The winds and tidal surge were devastating. Downing power lines like falling dominoes. But once the power lines are back up electric power will flow again. Imagine if they had to rebuild the power generating infrastructure, too. If the areas affected by super storm Sandy were powered by clean energy of the future. Wind power and solar power. If these were swept away like falling dominoes, too, it would take months to install new solar arrays and windmills. In fact, it would take so long that they would probably attach the grid in those areas to a coal-fired power plant. Until they could rebuild the clean power of the future. While the detested coal-fired power plant (detested by the Left) shoulders the load comfortably. Allowing those ravaged by super storm Sandy to return to normalcy quicker. In fact, it would be far less costly just to leave these areas connected to a coal-fired power plant. And smarter. Because there will be other super storms coming that will just sweep the new solar arrays and windmills away like the previous ones.

If you’re interested in protecting human life during trying times you should embrace oil and coal. As one will allow people to live when everything else is failing them. And the other will allow the restoration of power as soon as the power lines are restored. Something that solar and wind won’t do.

Week in Review

The US government has finalized a plan to encourage new solar-energy projects on federal lands in several western states. The area covered by the new agreement is 285,000 acres, consisting of seventeen “solar energy zones.” considered to be the best locations for solar development…

The Obama administration has authorized the development of 10,000 megawatts of solar, wind and geothermal projects. These would provide enough energy to power more than 3.5 million homes, said Salazar. According to Salazar, solar and wind energy production has doubled since Obama took office.

You know what the federal government doesn’t have to encourage? The building of coal-fired power plants. In fact, the demand for the electric power a coal-fired power plant produces is so great that the government has to increase the cost of building and operating them to discourage people from building them. Why? To please President Obama’s liberal, environmental base. Which includes a lot of wealthy donors. The environmentalists don’t like coal or the cheap and reliable electric power it produces. So they attack coal. And encourage government to subsidize solar power. Because solar power is not cheap or reliable like the electric power produced by coal-fired power plants. Which is why no one will build a solar power plant without massive government subsidies.

Power plants have capacity factors. Which we calculate by dividing actual power produced by the maximum possible power a power plant can produce over a period of time. A typical capacity factor for a coal-fired plant is approximately 90%. Because all you need is fuel. Unlike a solar power plant. Which has a capacity factor of approximately 20%. The reason why it’s so much lower than a coal-fired power plant is that solar power plants turn off every evening at dusk and turn back on at dawn. Something you don’t have to do with coal. Because you can burn coal all day long. Even at night. Which is when we use electric power the most. To light our homes. To run our air conditioners after work. To power our televisions we watch after dinner.

So 10,000 megawatts is not likely to power 3.5 million homes. Especially at night. Unless they build a very expensive energy storage system to store the electric power they make during the day to use at night. As long as no one needs any electric power during the day. As you can see solar power is not what the government thinks it is. It’s a novelty at best. That is very, very expensive despite sunlight being free. Why is it so expensive? Because that 285,000 acres needs to be covered with solar panels. And for this power to be useful at night there’s that aforementioned energy storage system. All of this to provide what a coal-fired power plant can produce with about 30% the installed capacity of the solar power plant. Which makes the logical and rational choice coal. Not solar. Yet our government chooses solar over coal. Which tells us what? Our government is neither logical nor rational.

Week in Review

Renewable energy advocates paint a rosy picture for solar power and wind power. There are huge gains in installations despite the high-profile failures like government backed Solyndra. And all they need to build on these successes is a dump-truck full of more government subsidies, tariffs and legislation forcing consumers to pay more for energy (see U.S. solar and wind industries expand by Wendy Koch posted 3/14/2012 on USA Today).

Newly installed solar panels produced 109% more electricity nationwide last year than in 2010, reaching a record 1,855 megawatts, as the price of these panels plummeted by more than 50%, according to a report today by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), an industry group, and GTM Research.

“The U.S. remains the innovative center of the solar industry worldwide,” says Rhone Resch, SEIA’s president. He says “run-of-the-mill” panels may increasingly be made overseas, but the U.S. still will make the most advanced solar components and post double-digit annual growth. He expects solar power, which now produces less than 1% of U.S. electricity, to generate 10% by 2020…

“It’s not all rosy. … There have been growing pains of late,” says Ron Pernick, managing director for Clean Edge, a research firm. He expects “considerable consolidation.”

A federal “production tax credit,” which lowers the wind industry’s cost of producing power, is slated to expire at the end of 2012. Also at issue:

•A Treasury Department program, which Resch says helped many solar start-ups, expired at the end of last year. On Tuesday, the U.S. Senate rejected an effort to restart the Section 1603 program, which allows companies to take upfront cash grants in lieu of tax credits.

•The Department of Commerce is likely Monday to decide whether to impose duties on solar panels made in China in response to an unfair-trade complaint filed by Oregon-based SolarWorld and six unnamed solar manufacturers. If it imposes duties, Resch expects a slight increase in panel prices.

•Low natural-gas prices are threatening the economic rationale for renewable energy. Pernick says the wind and solar industries will still grow, because more than two dozen states now require utilities to produce more of their power from renewables.

Yes, solar and wind are viable energy alternatives. As long as we make consumers pay more in taxes to subsidize these industries. We punish them for buying lower-priced solar panels. And we force them to pay higher utility bills so utilities use more expensive renewable energy instead of less expensive natural gas. If only we do these, and tank the U.S. economy in the process, we can make renewable energy viable. Which it clearly isn’t. Because we have to do these things.

The Left Promotes and Attacks Electrical Power

The Left wants to get rid of the internal combustion engine and make all cars green. Plug-ins. Cars with batteries that charge by plugging them into electrical outlets. They say it will break our dependence on foreign oil. And stimulate the economy with new green technology. For the same reason they want to dot the landscape with high-speed electric trains. They want to make everything electric. Because electric motors don’t pollute.

At the same time there is an all out assault on electrical generation in this country. The nuclear power industry (the closest to a ‘green’ useful source of electricity we have) has been stalled since 1979 thanks to The China Syndrome and Three Mile Island. Hydroelectric dams (another ‘green’ source of useful electricity) kill fish and alter the ecosystem. So we can’t build them anymore. With two down they’re turning their sights onto fossil fuels. And they’re locked and loaded (see E.P.A. Proposes New Emission Standards for Power Plants by John Broder and John Collins Rudolf posted 3/16/2011 on The New York Times).

The Environmental Protection Agency proposed the first national standard for emissions of mercury and other toxins from coal-burning power plants on Wednesday, a rule that could lead to the early closing of dozens of generating stations and is certain to be challenged by the utility industry and Republicans in Congress…

She estimated the total annual cost of compliance at about $10 billion, in line with some industry estimates (although some are much higher), and the health and environmental benefits at more than $100 billion a year. She said that households could expect to see their electric bills rise by $3 to $4 a month when the regulation is fully in force after 2015.

With the country struggling to come out of the greatest recession since the Great Depression they want to raise the cost of energy? For what? Health and environmental benefits they pull out of the air (there are no ledgers anywhere totaling these costs)? To offset one of the highest regulatory costs to come down the pike in history? This is insanity. One has to ask do they want to push the nation into a depression? Or are they that ignorant in things economic?

She said that installing and maintaining smokestack scrubbers and other control technology would create 31,000 short-term construction jobs and 9,000 permanent utility sector jobs.

Okay, we increase the cost of electricity forever but we get a few temporary construction jobs. Construction jobs aside, if you do the math, each of those new permanent jobs will end up costing us over $1 million each year. In addition to their wages and benefits. All paid for by the electrical consumer. The fact that they talk about this as a good thing shows their utter ignorance of things economic. And contempt for the consumer.

The National Association of Manufacturers said the proposed rule would lead to higher electricity prices and significant job losses.

“In addition, electric system reliability could be compromised by coal retirements and new environmental construction projects caused by this proposed rule and other E.P.A. regulations,” said Aric Newhouse, the group’s vice president for government relations. “Stringent, unrealistic regulations such as these will curb the recent economic growth we have seen.”

Manufacturers use a lot of electricity. The more they have to pay for it the less they can spend elsewhere. The new utility costs will always be there. To stay competitive in the market, they will have to offset that permanent increase with cuts in their operating costs. Translation? Layoffs. Or they simply will not hire new people. Instead they will make capital investments to increase their productivity. And use fewer people. This is how they do things when costs go up. Either that or they will send manufacturing operations out of the country.

What Happens in Vegas isn’t much these Days

Economic activity is driven by disposable income. That’s the money you have left after paying the things you have to pay for just to subsist. Food. Mortgage. Gasoline. Property taxes. Those kind of things. Once we pay these, we can splurge on economic stimulation with what’s left over. Dinners out. Movies. Vacations. And gambling (see The Penny Slot Economic Indicator by Douglas French posted 3/16/2011 on Ludwig von Mises Institute).

Those at the Fed and in the financial press are telling us that the economy is turning around. Corporate America is ginning up profits so prosperity on main street can’t be far away…

However, if gaming trends in Nevada are any indication the middle class is hurting. Tourism and gaming peaked in 2007, with middle America making the trek to the gambling city to sit down and play a little blackjack (or 21). Latest figures have blackjack revenue down 31 percent from 2007, the Las Vegas Sun reports.

Last year was the first time baccarat, a game favored by Chinese high-rollers, generated more revenue than blackjack. But the $1.2 billion in baccarat revenue pales next to the $2 billion that penny slot machines generated…

Casinos worked in Las Vegas because people went to Las Vegas to lose their money. It’s a destination city. All the other cities who opened casinos to cure their budgetary woes saw no magic. The middle class just spent their money at the casinos instead of at the movies or the restaurants. And by taking staycations. We spent the same amount of money in the community. We just spent it at different locations.

The recession may be over according to Washington, but it’s not over for the middle class. Because they haven’t returned to vacationing in Las Vegas. Why? They don’t have as much money as they used to have. And prices are going up. A double whammy. They have less to spend and subsistence costs are on the rise.

If Energy Costs Rise Food Costs Rise

In the summer of 2010 the Obama administration was touting their summer of recovery. Declaring that their stimulus spending had ended the recession. They were a bit premature. Unemployment is still close to 9%. Despite all of their quantitative easing. They printed a lot of money. Didn’t help. Worse, on top of stubborn high unemployment, prices are going up on almost everything (see Wholesale prices up 1.6 pct. on steep rise in food by the Associated Press posted 3/16/2011 on Yahoo! Finance).

Wholesale prices jumped last month by the most in nearly two years due to higher energy costs and the steepest rise in food prices in 36 years. Excluding those volatile categories, inflation was tame…

Food prices soared 3.9 percent last month, the biggest gain since November 1974. Most of that increase was due to a sharp rise in vegetable costs, which increased nearly 50 percent. That was the most in almost a year. Meat and dairy products also rose.

Energy prices rose 3.3 percent last month, led by a 3.7 percent increase in gasoline costs.

Separately, the Commerce Department said home construction plunged to a seasonally adjusted 479,000 homes last month, down 22.5 percent from the previous month. It was lowest level since April 2009, and the second-lowest on records dating back more than a half-century…

Food costs, meanwhile, are rising. Bad weather in the past year has damaged crops in Australia, Russia, and South America. Demand for corn for ethanol use has also contributed to the increase.

Prices rose 1 percent for apparel, the most in 21 years. Costs also increased for cars, jewelry, and consumer plastics.

Some would love to see $4/gallon gasoline again. It would push people into electric cars and mass transportation. But there’s a downside. A big one. Higher energy costs make everything more expensive. Even our vegetables. Because those vegetable don’t appear by magic in the grocery store. They travel long ways on trucks that burn diesel fuel to get to the grocery store.

Food and energy are tied at the hip. If energy costs rise food costs rise. And when you siphon some food off to make low-energy ethanol that no one wants that just increases food costs more. We should use food for food. And oil for fuel. It’s more cost efficient. And consumers will have more money left over to stimulate the economy with.

The Left Makes a Very Poor Argument Against Nuclear Power

And speaking of energy, nuclear energy is in the news these days in a big way. But not in a good way. Japan has some reactors that were hit with a one-two punch of earthquake and tsunami. The tsunami took out the cooling systems. So there’s a little trepidation over these plants right now. And absolute glee as anti-nuclear people exploit this for all it’s worth. They’re saying, “See! That’s what could happen in America right now. And in Europe. We need to stop all nuclear power.” I’m paraphrasing, of course. But you get the gist. Why, some are even playing loose with facts. Even lying. And some are writing top 10 lists why nuclear power is bad and why solar and wind are good (see Too Cheap to Meter: The Top 10 Myths of Nuclear Power by Michael Rose posted 3/15/2011 on The Huffington Post).

The best way to generate new power for the long term is not to build nukes but to invest in large scale solar and wind, coupled with natural gas as a transition in the short term.

The problem has been coordinating the power produced when the wind blows and the sun shines, distributing the power and storage. There are solutions to all of these. “You need to link up the disparate sources to compensate for when the wind is blowing and the sun isn’t shining,”

Coordinating the wind and the sun? Really? That should be our energy policy? And how will that work during a major blackout? Like the Northeast Blackout of 2003? Can solar power really run all our air conditioning systems during the dog days of summer? Our fossil fuel-fired plants can’t always do that. Can you imagine a hot summer without those high capacity plants? The inevitable blackouts won’t be rolling. They’ll simply be scheduled daily during air conditioning weather.

The nuclear industry has asked for loan guarantees from the Federal government because the banks looked at the risk and took a pass. With the loan guarantees in hand the companies can get financing and if they default, or walk away from the projects (which is what happened before) the taxpayers will be stuck with the bill. “It’s the same as if you defaulted on your mortgage and the Federal government had to step in to pay the banks back,” said Hirsch.

We saw above how new regulations are going to cost the coal-fired plant operators. The new regulations will probably force some plants to shut down. This is the fear of regulation. Uncertainty. If you change the rules midway through the game there’s a good chance you’re going to end up losing in the end. Power plants are costly. They are difficult to build because of the regulatory hoops you have to jump through. It is a very high-risk game. And nowhere are the risks and regulatory hoops greater than nuclear power. These plants take even longer to build. Are far more costly because of the regulatory compliance costs. And have by far the greatest uncertainty because of the length of time from drawing board to operating on line because of these regulatory hurdles. This is why banks don’t want to invest. Because the government can change the rules and prevent a plant from ever going on line, leaving the bank to eat the construction costs.

It’s true that building the reactors does create jobs, but these disappear when the reactor is complete. And there are staff positions for running the reactors, providing maintenance and security but not enough to warrant the high costs and risks…

Ironically some fear that building new nukes will chase jobs away because electric rates will have to dramatically increase to pay them off. “No state ever created a net increase in jobs by raising electric rates to commercial and industrial customers. Such a policy drives jobs out of many businesses to create relatively few permanent jobs at the new reactor,” said Bradford.

Funny. The same arguments work for other federal stimulus spending. Those short-term construction jobs are good when they’re trying to pass a stimulus bill. But it’s not good if it will stimulate nuclear power. And they say here that increasing the cost of electricity will kill jobs. Meanwhile, increasing the cost of electricity by adding new regulations for coal-fired plants will increase jobs. Costs are funny that way. Sometimes they’re bad. Sometimes they’re good. Sometimes they’re rooted in reality. Other times, in fantasy.

France is pointed to as demonstrable proof that nuclear power can be affordable and safe. While it’s true France gets about 75% of its electricity from nuclear power and that it has avoided a large scale disaster but we don’t know very much about their accident record since its industry is nationalized and run behind a veil of secrecy…

It also adds to the costs of the producing nuclear power which is one reason French electric rates are 20% above U.S. rates despite subsidies, according to Bradford.

So, yes, France has energy independence. And they haven’t had a nuclear disaster. But that doesn’t mean anything. They could. Just because they didn’t doesn’t mean they can’t have a China syndrome next week. Or tomorrow. So we should proceed as if they will. Despite their safety record. And the cost? Interesting. Because the source they cite paints a little different picture.

The present situation is due to the French government deciding in 1974, just after the first oil shock, to expand rapidly the country’s nuclear power capacity. This decision was taken in the context of France having substantial heavy engineering expertise but few indigenous energy resources. Nuclear energy, with the fuel cost being a relatively small part of the overall cost, made good sense in minimising imports and achieving greater energy security.

As a result of the 1974 decision, France now claims a substantial level of energy independence and almost the lowest cost electricity in Europe. It also has an extremely low level of CO2 emissions per capita from electricity generation, since over 90% of its electricity is nuclear or hydro.

In mid 2010 a regular energy review of France by the International Energy Agency urged the country increasingly to take a strategic role as provider of low-cost, low-carbon base-load power for the whole of Europe rather than to concentrate on the energy independence which had driven policy since 1973.

Energy independence? Low fuel costs? Almost the cheapest electricity in Europe? Extremely low CO2 emissions? And the International Energy Agency wants them to be the provider of “low-cost, low-carbon base-load power for the whole of Europe…” I don’t know. These sound like good things to me. Talk about being a bit disingenuous. And by a bit I mean a lot. Clearly they are cherry-picking some facts to forward an agenda. Speaking of which, back to the HuffPo.

All civilian nuclear programs create spent fuel that can be reprocessed into weapons grade plutonium. This is what Iran, North Korea, India and Pakistan have done.

It doesn’t take much. At first you needed a chunk of plutonium about the size of a softball now it’s down to the size of a golf ball. “If a country has done its engineering, it can take about a week to go to a bomb,” said Gillinsky. “Safeguard inspections are too late.”

And here we come to why we use the energy we use. Because it’s concentrated. A little bit of nuclear fuel goes a long way. Just like our fossil fuels. That’s why our cars run on gasoline. Because it’s easy to store and it’s highly concentrated. With a small tank of fuel you can drive a very long way. While carrying your whole family. And a lot of your stuff. That’s why we don’t drive electric cars. You can’t do any of this in a battery-electric car. The battery takes up too much space. And you just can’t go very far on a charge.

Solar farms and wind farms are not concentrated sources of energy. The very term we use to describe these generating ‘plants’ tells us this. You need so many of them that we call them ‘farms’. Not ‘plants’. And even with a large footprint their electricity output won’t come close to what the power plants using concentrated-fuels can produce. A couple of reactors on a small site can power a large city. It would take a very large plantation of solar panels and windmills to produce the same amount of electricity. And they will only produce when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. Our concentrated fuel-fired power plant will be there 24/7, day or night, rain or shine.

Will the Great Recession turn into the Great Depression II?

Never before has our energy policy been in such a mess. The children have taken control of policy. They’re promoting fanciful solar panels and windmills no doubt while dreaming of unicorns and sugar plum fairies. They don’t understand energy. Or economics.

Energy costs. Construction costs. Fuel costs are recurring. While construction costs are one-time. Therefore, the best economic policy would be to minimize fuel costs. And coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear do just that. You get huge amounts of energy from small amounts of fuel. Especially nuclear.

Yes, sunshine and wind are free. And you can’t minimize fuel costs more than free (except with nuclear that can use some nuclear waste to produce more fuel). But the infrastructure cost to make solar and wind provide meaningful amounts of energy are staggering. A nuclear plant can sit on a small footprint out of the way. While solar and wind farms will take acres of land. Or water (for offshore wind generation).

While they play with energy and economic policies, consumer costs rise everywhere. And will continue to do so. As a direct consequence of their policies. Consumers pay more. And the greatest recession since the Great Depression drags on. Perhaps turning recession into depression. Could the Great Depression II be around the corner? I hope not. But one can’t rule it out with the current administration.